The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Open accessAbstract
CONTEXT: Despite the widespread use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the appropriateness of these procedures in contemporary practice is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the appropriateness of PCI in the United States. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Multicenter, prospective study of patients within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry undergoing PCI between July 1, 2009, and September 30, 2010, at 1091 US hospitals. The appropriateness of PCI was adjudicated using the appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization. Results were stratified by whether the procedure was performed for an acute (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, or unstable angina with high-risk features) or nonacute indication. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of acute and nonacute PCIs classified as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate; extent of hospital-level variation in inappropriate procedures. RESULTS: Of 500,154 PCIs, 355,417 (71.1%) were for acute indications (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 103,245 [20.6%]; non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 105,708 [21.1%]; high-risk unstable angina, 146,464 [29.3%]), and 144,737 (28.9%) for nonacute indications. For acute indications, 350,469 PCIs (98.6%) were classified as appropriate, 1055 (0.3%) as uncertain, and 3893 (1.1%) as inappropriate. For nonacute indications, 72,911 PCIs (50.4%) were classified as appropriate, 54,988 (38.0%) as uncertain, and 16,838 (11.6%) as inappropriate. The majority of inappropriate PCIs for nonacute indications were performed in patients with no angina (53.8%), low-risk ischemia on noninvasive stress testing (71.6%), or suboptimal (≤1 medication) antianginal therapy (95.8%). Furthermore, although variation in the proportion of inappropriate PCI across hospitals was minimal for acute procedures, there was substantial hospital variation for nonacute procedures (median hospital rate for inappropriate PCI, 10.8%; interquartile range, 6.0%-16.7%). CONCLUSIONS: In this large contemporary US cohort, nearly all acute PCIs were classified as appropriate. For nonacute indications, however, 12% were classified as inappropriate, with substantial variation across hospitals.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Optimal Medical Therapy with or without PCI for Stable Coronary Disease
Boden, W. E., O'Rourke, R. A., Teo, K. K., Hartigan, P. M., Maron, D. J., Kostuk, W. J., Knudtson, M., Dada, M., Casperson, P., Harris, C. L., et al. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa070829 · Cited by 4,699
Self-citationPartitioning Variation in Multilevel Models
Goldstein, H., Browne, W., & Rasbash, J. (2002) · Understanding Statistics · doi:10.1207/s15328031us0104_02 · Cited by 874
Cited by
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2017 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Benjamin, E. J., Blaha, M. J., Chiuve, S. E., Cushman, M., Das, S. R., Deo, R., de Ferranti, S. D., Floyd, J., Fornage, M., Gillespie, C., et al. (2017) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000485 · Cited by 12,591
Heart disease and stroke statistics-2018 update: a report from the american heart association
Benjamin, E. J., Virani, S. S., Callaway, C. W., Chamberlain, A. M., Chang, A. R., Cheng, S., Chiuve, S. E., Cushman, M., Delling, F. N., Deo, R., et al. (2018) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000558 · Cited by 7,146
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2016 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Mozaffarian, D., Benjamin, E. J., Go, A. S., Arnett, D. K., Blaha, M. J., Cushman, M., Das, S. R., de Ferranti, S., Després, J.-P., Fullerton, H. J., et al. (2016) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000350 · Cited by 6,596
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2015 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Mozaffarian, D., Benjamin, E. J., Go, A. S., Arnett, D. K., Blaha, M. J., Cushman, M., de Ferranti, S., Després, J.-P., Fullerton, H. J., Howard, V. J., et al. (2015) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0000000000000152 · Cited by 5,797
Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2013 Update: A Report From the American Heart Association
Go, A. S., Mozaffarian, D., Roger, V. L., Benjamin, E. J., Berry, J. D., Borden, W. B., Bravata, D. M., Dai, S., Ford, E. S., Fox, C. S., et al. (2013) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/cir.0b013e31828124ad · Cited by 5,292
Metadata
- Authors
- Chan, P. S., Patel, M. R., Klein, L. W., Krone, R. J., Dehmer, G. J., Kennedy, K., Nallamothu, B. K., Weaver, W. D., Masoudi, F. A., Rumsfeld, J. S., Brindis, R. G., & Spertus, J. A.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2011-07-06
- Volume
- 306
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 53-61
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2023310736
- Cited by
- 367
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 56.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2011.916
- The paper
- Chan, P. S., Patel, M. R., Klein, L. W., Krone, R. J., Dehmer, G. J., Kennedy, K., Nallamothu, B. K., Weaver, W. D., Masoudi, F. A., Rumsfeld, J. S., Brindis, R. G., & Spertus, J. A. (2011). Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.916
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.